Impact of Mentors in 6.1 - More Important Than I Thought
 

Setup....

49ers using rosters included with the game.
Injuries set to 0, coach does not change roster or depth charts.

Test Player - Patrick Willis
Starting Stats (Before Preseason) - 33/78

4 Test Scenarios Run, 10 Seasons each Test.

a. With Mentor As Starter (+Mentor +Starter)
b. With Mentor Not a Starter (+Mentor -Starter)
c. Without Mentor As Starter (-Mentor +Starter)
d. Without Mentor Not a Starter (-Mentor -Starter)


Findings

(all values represent final xx/78 player rating)

a. With Mentor As Starter (+Mentor +Starter)

1. 64
2. 64
3. 63
4. 62
5. 69
6. 61
7. 64
8. 57
9. 65
10. 59

Average - 62.8

High - 69
Low - 57


b. With Mentor Not a Starter (+Mentor -Starter)

1. 43
2. 43
3. 39
4. 42
5. 41
6. 42
7. 43
8. 42
9. 42
10. 42

Average - 41.9
Variance from (+Mentor +Starter) - 20.9

High - 43
Low - 39


c. Without Mentor As Starter (-Mentor +Starter)

1. 42
2. 48
3. 44
4. 53
5. 47
6. 43
7. 54
8. 54
9. 43
10. 49

Average - 47.7
Variance from (+Mentor +Starter) - 15.1

High - 54
Low - 42


d. Without Mentor Not a Starter (-Mentor -Starter)

1. 37
2. 36
3. 37
4. 37
5. 36
6. 38
7. 38
8. 36
9. 37
10. 37

Average - 36.9
Variance from (+Mentor +Starter) - 25.9

High - 38
Low - 36

Conclusion....

I am surprised by the importance of a mentor, it is a full 15 points of development over not having a mentor, with the player starting in both scenarios.

Not having a mentor and the player starting seems similar in development to having a mentor and the player no starting.

From this test I think that it is more important than I thought to have a mentor on your roster for your stud rookies. Also, starting seems to be a little more valuable than I thought.

Also, from this I have learned that I should expect almost no development out of a player without a mentor and who is not starting (or playing a lot). Makes me wonder about the value of drafting a QB to sit for a few seasons.

THINGS NOT CONSIDERED IN THIS TEST...

1. Impact of sending the player to the summer league in their second season.
2. Other positions, P. Willis is a SILB, other positions may be treated differently.
3. Impact of splitting time (playing time for the SILB position was always set to 100%).
4. Impact of offseason training camp on the development of a player.


Cheers, and all comments are welcome.

Nogram.

Great stuff, validates the importance of mentors for sure.

good info

What about having a mentor who is inactive? Can you pick up some cheap mentor, say 11/11, and just have him inactive but still get the benefits of having a mentor?
I'd also be interested to see the test run with a highly rated mentor versus a lower rated player.

I'm pretty sure it's been shown in the past that mentors have to be active to be effective...

They do?

Ah, didn't know that. good to know.

Yes. Active. CT's study a couple of years or so ago proved that.

Was it ever confirmed that 2k7 was the same way?

No...but give me a few minutes. I can double-check it.

Interesting. This may take a bit longer. My first test guy is probably masked, now that I think about it. I'll load a savegame and use a known commodity.

OK. Found a known commodity with low masking. Gimme a few to sim forward and get this set up...

YR

Pick

POS

LAST

FIRST

Gr

Adj

40yd

Sol

Str

Agi

Brd

Pos

Dev

Vol

Exp

Imp

Cur1

Fut1

Cur2

Fut2

MaxCur

MaxFut

CurChg

FutChg

FirstCamp

2015

1(10)

RB

Garner

Heath

6.1

6.5

4.43

34

20

7.17

10'2"

32

40

43

F

UR

28

48

30

50

52

52

24

4

2

Perfect! He went to 30/50 after his first camp in this run, too.

Well, not now. Gotta go do something else. I'd be surprised if this mechanism was changed up, though...

I've tested this a few times in 6.0 and 6.1. My studies show the mentor does not have to be active. If I recall correctly, I ran five seasons for each of these, no injuries, starters:

Exp		Difference
1	QB - Mentor Active	11.0
1	QB - Mentor Inactive	9.3
1	RB - Mentor Active	2.7
1	RB - Mentor Inactive	0.7
1	T - Mentor Active	10.0
1	T - Mentor Inactive	8.0
1	MLB - Mentor Active	8.0
1	MLB - Mentor Inactive	11.0
2	G - Mentor Active	9.0
2	G - Mentor Inactive	10.0
2	SE - Mentor Active	8.3
2	SE - Mentor Inactive	9.3
2	DT - Mentor Active	4.3
2	DT - Mentor Inactive	3.3
2	WLB - Mentor Active	3.3
2	WLB - Mentor Inactive	4.0

Did you run any seasons without a mentor?? Seems to me you'd have to know the effects of not having a mentor before saying inactive mentors have an effect.

Yes. The "difference" column you see is the difference between having no mentor on the roster and either an active or inactive mentor on the roster.

Fair enough.

Interesting...several positions show better increases when the mentor is inactive. Hmmm.

I'd love to see this confirmed. It changes quite a bit of strategy if you can keep these guys as your inactive bench guys.

I don't think it's a positional difference. I think it's just sample size. As I stated earlier, I only ran something like 5 seasons per player. I'd bet if you ran 50 seasons per player then the increases would be nearly identical.

I've watched 3 players on just one of MP teams increase 4 points (through 13 weeks) without playing a single down and my mentors in inactive status. I know in the 3 MP leagues I'm in, it can be difficult to find mentors. If your league doesn't employ the use of mentors in an inactive status then I'm sure there will be more competition for those guys as more implement the strategy.

Also, if I remember correctly, the player being mentored must be active to receive the benefit. I didn't save any of that info.